Did not sleep well, the allergies or cold, whatever this is, is killing me. After talking all night with Paul and a noisy bar I have little voice left too. And now there is a cough. But with all considered, it was a good day yesterday.
Instead of tracking panels from a given sub-theme (as the conference is organized), I decided to go to the mini artist talks (25 minutes each), which took place in the Hotel meeting rooms. The first one I went to (arriving late) was by Dutch artist Robbert de Goede. His works revolve around the creation of string structures in real space that visually look like wireframe computer renderings, but in actuality are handmade. I thought the tension between the virtual and the actual were confounding in a beautiful way. The work is very simple and minimal, very formal, but yet very satisfying. I went to that room because I wanted to see Paul Hertz's talk, which was next. He is a great speaker, and his work, using algorithms to generate patterns and imagery were fascinating. His actual process/design is too complicated for me to explain. Because his talk went too long (the previous one ended late), we did not have time for Q&A. I really wanted to ask him why, after all the heavy computer programming he goes into to arrive at his images (imagine programming birds flying patterns, then creating attracting and repulsing points, adding winds, etc - this in the Boids series), and at the end show large scale prints (which I bet are gorgeous). All the work he showed implied time (specially in Blue Noise and Boids, but to some extent in Trees). I wondered why he did not create things moving in time, but static images.
This is something that is becoming very apparent in this conference, as far as the way in which artists work. Some are very experimental and arrive to a place where objects are created, once they go through an investigative/research process and design, while others only exist in the rhetorical and/or research level (like nothing is really produced at the end of an investigation, as far as art is concerned). Paul and I talked a lot about that last night. It seems that there are all these smart people who undertake these very complicated paths of knowledge with some social awareness in there, the social practice crowd, but at the end there isn't much to see or do. Their work becomes a series of lectures about their research, and I imagine a publication of it. This was evident to me to some extent in Krista Caballero's presentation, which I actually really enjoyed (specially since it featured Karina Aguillera Skvirski at one point). Her current work revolves around the topic of Ecotone, or tensions in the eco system. Using an all-female surveying team photograph from the 1930s as a driving inspiration, she has set up these all women "conferences" that bring together experts from varied disciplines, and in situ they all present their ideas in practicum sessions. At the end of the presentation I asked her what she is going to do with all that stuff, if she planned on showing them anywhere as art, and she told me she was not sure, but that a book was probably gonna come out.
So in a way, the more time I spend at ISEA, the more academic I find it. But in a weird way the notion of making art to some extent is secondary to many of the participants here, which in turn make them artists who operate only in a traditional academic format (of presentations and publications). I suspect that many still struggle with that attempt to legitimize art as a valid discipline in their institutions, as intellectual as other humanities and sciences. My gut feeling is that they completely undermine the power, even the subversive power, an art museum or gallery still have in the culture at large. Because of its isolation they may assume it is rarefied and elitist, or too commercial. I still think it is, in many respects, untapped potential, if all the research and findings do not get filtered back into an art context (because it may come across as shoddy and/or self indulgent research).
After Caballero's talk (which I really enjoyed, and the paragraph above is actually not really about her presentation and work, but more so from the previous day), I tracked down to a talk on Robert Smithson, which I arrived late, and really did not get where it was going (and left early to go to the museum for another presentation). At 11 am the official ISEA International General Meeting took place, which was a long-winded affair, but very informative, about what will happen in the years to come. The upcoming conferences in Sidney and Dubai were presented in detail (I really want to go to the Sidney one, but it might be fiscally impossible, as it takes place in June and I'll be out of travel money by then), and the Dubai one seems weird, though the place sounds fascinating. Then there were presentations on the four candidates for the 2015 conference, Yogyakarta, Mexico City, Amsterdam, and Vancouver. The Indonesia and Mexico ones, to me, sounded most promising, but it sort of came across as if Vancouver was already in the bag, so to speak.
By the end of this presentation, about 1 pm, I was starving and exhausted. At 1:15 pm Charlie Lindsay was presenting his work in a panel (we were in a residency program together), and I really wanted to go, but I was starving, so I went to the cafe in the museum, but the line was kilometric. I ended up walking to the food trucks and ordering a Shrimp Po Boy sandwich, which was pretty good. But the heat and the altitude got the best of me, and at one point I almost passed out (had to sit down in a shade). Not feeling 100% I walked into the Natural History museum (across from the food trucks) and went to the planetarium to see a performance, but when I got there it was not properly working. After sitting in the dark for a few minutes and drinking tons of water I decided to leave, and headed to the hotel for a couple hours to recharge. I did not fall asleep but sometimes laying down is just enough.
I was told I missed some great presentations, but I thought it was okay to do that. By 4 pm I was back in the lobby looking for the presentations of Joe DeLappe and Margaret Dolinsky. They were back to back, and I really enjoyed their work. What Joe will be doing this Spring with the bike tracking will be pretty amazing, and Margaret's weird immersive environments really made me think of many issues of embodiment, social behavior, and art behavior. It was there that I ran into Ben Chang and Silvia , whom I had not seen for a couple years now. They have had a baby and moved to Albany, where Ben teaches at RPI.
I had texted Paul to go to the reception together, and we both met at the museum at around 5:30. The exhibition, Machine Wilderness, was pretty much incredible. The facilities and the installation were impeccable, y displaying the best works wonderfully. Fernando's piece was the highlight to me. The exhibition extended to other locations, and eventually we headed to downtown to the 516 space, another incredible non-profit in town. Ran into all kinds of people there, met some new ones, and had a very good talk with Lynn Cazabon (whose presentation I missed). She told me about her iPad app, called Junkspace, which I already downloaded and played with (it is fun and informative and beautiful too, and it is free). We traced back our encounters and then talked about all kinds of things, it was very enjoyable. Eventually Paul and I left the place, went to another gallery that had a beautiful show, and drove to a diner (this time a classy one) and had dinner.
We were supposed to meet Ben and Silvia for drinks, but we got disconnected (they were having a late dinner), so Paul and I went to the QBar at the hotel and had one drink and a very long conversation. I went to bed past 11 pm, and woke up at 1, and then at 3, and then at 4, and 5, and it is 7:30 now... it's gonna be a long day....
- posted via iPad
Location:Hotel Albuquerque, San Pasquale Ave NW,Albuquerque,United States
No comments:
Post a Comment